House of Commons Defence Committee Open Source Stupidity: The Threat to the BBC Monitoring Service: Responses to the Committee’s Fifth Report Eighth Special Report of Session 2016–17 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 28 February 2017 HC 1066 Published on 10 March 2017 by authority of the House of Commons The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies Current membership Dr Julian Lewis MP (Conservative, New Forest East) (Chair) Douglas Chapman MP (Scottish National Party, Dunfermline and West Fife) James Gray MP (Conservative, North Wiltshire) Jack Lopresti MP (Conservative, Filton and Bradley Stoke) Johnny Mercer MP (Conservative, Plymouth, Moor View) Mrs Madeleine Moon MP (Labour, Bridgend) Gavin Robinson MP (Democratic Unionist Party, Belfast East) Ruth Smeeth MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent North) John Spellar MP (Labour, Warley) Bob Stewart MP (Conservative, Beckenham) Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in the House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No. 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the relevant inquiry page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are James Davies (Clerk), Dr Adam Evans (Second Clerk), John Curtis, Ian Thomson, Eleanor Scarnell, and David Nicholas (Committee Specialists), David Gardner (Senior Committee Assistant), Carolyn Bowes (Committee Assistant). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Defence Committee, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 5857; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]. Media inquiries should be addressed to Alex Paterson on 020 7219 1589. Eighth Special Report Session 2016–17 3 Eighth Special Report On 20 December 2016 the Defence Committee published its Fifth Report of Session 2016–17, Open Source Stupidity: The Threat to the BBC Monitoring Service (HC 748). The Government’s response was received on 1 February 2017 and the BBC’s response was received on 20 February 2017. The two responses are appended to this report. Appendix A: Government Response Introduction BBC Monitoring (BBCM) are reorganising their operation to ensure that they continue delivering a modern, flexible service. This service is evolving to enable Government and other customers to fully exploit Open Source information. The Government renegotiated the Monitoring Agreement with BBCM in 2016, and discussed specific services and the impact of the proposed changes for customers within Government. The new agreement came into effect on 1 January 2017. Under the new agreement BBCM will need to continue to provide the Government with a high quality service, sourcing and collating information for UK defence and security. We welcome the work of the Committee in considering this issue. Response to the main conclusions of the report 1. BBC Monitoring used to be funded through individual contributions from its main departmental stakeholders, which were predominantly the Ministry of Defence, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Cabinet Office. In 2006–07, these individual streams of funding were consolidated into a ring-fenced grant administered by the Cabinet Office. That funding was supplemented by commercial sales to non- Government organisations. At the time of the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review, the Government and the BBC agreed to transfer responsibility for funding from Government to the BBC (in other words from the taxpayer to the licence fee-payer). (Paragraph 2) 2. We fully concur with the conclusion of the Foreign Affairs Committee that the Government made a serious mistake when it ceased funding BBC Monitoring to provide it with the vital open source material upon which it relies. The decisions made concerning the funding and governance of BBC Monitoring over the past decade or so have been woefully short-sighted and catastrophically ill thought-out. A service that has the potential to be a vital tool in opening the world to UK diplomacy and business is in grave danger of becoming a hollow shell of its former existence. (Paragraph 10) BBC Monitoring is funded from the television licence fee, which is set by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport under Section 365 of the Communications Act (2003). While the funds for BBCM are not ring-fenced by Government (the BBC being operationally and editorially independent), the new agreement provides Government with better assurance for continuing improvements. When relevant and as outlined in the BBC Framework Agreement the BBC is expected to uphold the same editorial standards for BBC Monitoring as they have for the UK Public Services. Under the new Monitoring 4 Eighth Special Report of Session 2016–17 Agreement, Government departments will be able to request “Additional Services” from BBCM which will be funded separately. This provides a mechanism for the Government to meet possible future additional requirements. We are confident that the Committee also recognizes that Government1 funding for all services, is continually subject to review and dependent on Government priorities at any given time. Responses to recommendations and conclusions: 3. The rarity of the product and the prestige of its customers underline the value of the service provided by BBC Monitoring. The world is becoming increasingly connected and information now travels at a speed never before known. It is important that the UK Government ensures that it has access to this information when planning to respond to crises abroad, whether it is political, military, humanitarian or medical. The service provided by BBC Monitoring is vital to that understanding. (Paragraph 23) 4. We are deeply concerned that the proposed changes will have a deleterious impact on the provision of information to the Government, and, in particular to the MoD. These changes, combined with additional budget cuts, run the risk of seriously undermining the range and quality of the service provided to the MoD and other Government departments. (Paragraph 46) BBCM outputs are important and valuable – and should be accessible together with all the other sources of information that Government relies upon. The BBCM reorganisation and modernisation programme is in part designed to improve the speed and flexibility of product delivery. In particular Government welcomes the BBCM reorganisation to ensure that it modernises and provides a quality service. The new BBCM Portal is a good example of how the service to Government is changing as it delivers timely product to mobiles, tablets, and desktop computers. In terms of BBCM reporting, topics of relevance to MOD (military, maritime, peacekeeping, international politics, proliferation, and terrorism) made up some 58% of BBCM output in 2016. Defence has not noticed any diminution or change in service as a result of changes being made by BBCM, and remain content with the service provided. The quality of the BBCM service, and its editorial independence, is underpinned by the BBC’s Framework Agreement. The relevance and range of BBCM outputs is maintained by a formal process; the Government now includes BBCM strategic prioritisation in its wider annual Requirements and Priorities process for other forms of information (such as secret intelligence). Ensuring access to BBCM outputs across Government is also the responsibility of Government itself – to ensure Government IT systems and processes maximise the use of BBCM product. 5. (BBCM) Individuals told us that they were no longer able to undertake the in- depth work on the Russian military that they could have done in previous years. As an example, we were told that they would no longer be able to undertake the level of detailed coverage previously provided on the so-called unassuming, unaffiliated soldiers who appeared in Crimea prior to the annexation of the region in 2014. Keir Giles also highlighted the reduction in capability and asserted that BBC Monitoring was no longer able to monitor the main Defence news agency (Interfax AVN) and 1 It should be noted that the previous arrangements did not guarantee a ring fenced amount for the service. Eighth Special Report Session 2016–17 5 the Russian Ministry of Defence television station (Zvezda) but was instead tasked to report globally on reactions to Bob Dylan being awarded the Nobel Prize. When we met the monitors on the Russia desk in Caversham, they were working on a story about Steven Seagal being given Russian citizenship. On the basis of such examples, which can be multiplied, it seems that the popularisation—if not infantilisation—of BBC Monitoring is well underway. (Paragraph 29) Coverage of the Russian media remains important for the Government. In 2016 the BBCM Portal issued 23,800 news reports with Russia as a subject country. In contrast there were only 19 reports mentioning Bob Dylan: most of these were reports of summaries of various news channels in Russia, Pakistan etc. Similarly there were only 16 Reports mentioning Steven Seagal getting Russian or Serbian citizenship. A considerable amount of the Government’s requirements for in depth work on the Russian military is provided via the Portal where reports sourced from Zvezda are available – including detailed summaries of Zvezda’s weekly “I Serve Russia” programme, and videos of military significance. In total, during 2016 BBCM issued 102 reports from Zvezda and 144 from Interfax AVN. This reporting is now available to all Government staff using the Portal. 6. Such a reliance on staff abroad is a matter of concern, particularly when those staff are based in countries which are considered to be unstable or hostile. It is very unwise for a Monitoring Service to become over-dependent on overseas staff who are vulnerable to pressure.